On May 3, 2017, in
Trevarthen v. Wilson, No. 4D16-2032, the Florida Fourth DCA reversed a trial court’s
summary judgment in favor of a defendant brokerage firm. ruling that material
issues of fact existed with respect to whether the brokerage firm was
vicariously liable for alleged misconduct by one of its associates. The
plaintiff claimed that the associate exploited and abused her by using
her money to pay for his personal expenses, causing her to engage in multiple
real estate transactions for his benefit and purchasing a condominium
in his own name with her money. The brokerage firm successfully argued
before the trial court that that the alleged wrongful acts of its associate
were outside the scope of his work on behalf of the brokerage firm and
were done to accomplish his own goals.

On review, the Florida Fourth DCA noted that general principles of vicarious
liability establish that a principal is responsible for the wrongful acts
of its agent if the agent was either acting “(1) within the scope
of [its authority], or (2) during the course of [the agency] and to further
a purpose or interest of the [principal].”
Valeo v. E. Coast Furniture Co., 95 So. 3d 921, 925 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). Additionally, a principal may
be still be liable for the acts of its agent which were outside the scope
of the agent’s authority if the principal subsequently ratifies
the actions.
SeeMcDonald v. Hamilton Elec., Inc. of Fla., 666 F.2d 509, 514 (11th Cir. 1982). A principal may ratify an agent’s
actions which would have otherwise been outside the scope of its authority
by accepting the benefit of the agent’s actions.
SeeMercury Ins. Co. of Fla. v. Sherwin, 982 So. 2d 1266, 1270 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (“A principal may not
accept the benefits of a transaction negotiated by the agent and disavow
the obligations of that same transaction.”). In reaching its decision,
the Fourth DCA focused specifically on the fact that the brokerage firm
had received commissions on the real estate transactions referred to in
the complaint, as well as on factual questions about the brokerage firm’s
knowledge of the underlying circumstances involved in the associate’s
purchase of the condo in his own name.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only.
Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual
case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt
or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.